SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam

Dec 10, 08 11:21

Post #1 of 64 (16600 views)

For those of you looking for a powermeter for next year.....

<Shameless Self Promotion>

We just finished up the second generation CinQo power meter - the CinQo Saturn. It has the same electronics as the original CinQo, but with updated mechanicals to improve calibration stablity when changing chainrings, etc. We have them in stock now at www.quarq.us. (Get 'em while they're hot!)

Secondly, next year we make our debut in the pro cycling with Cervelo TestTeam. The team will be running the CinQo Saturn with Q-rings on Rotor Agilis cranks in 2009. We are excited to be working with Cervelo and all the riders on both the men's and women's teams (Sastre, Hushovd, Kristen Armstrong, etc.) I just got back from the first team meeting and I think we are going to see a lot of new technology developed within the team and sponsors.

</Shameless Self Promotion>

Jim

James Meyer
Quarq Founder / SRAM

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Jim@Quarq] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 11:26

Post #2 of 64 (16584 views)

Any news on the Qranium? I think that is what a lot of us ANT+ users are also waiting for!

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Jim@Quarq] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 11:31

Post #3 of 64 (16565 views)

Jim...can I finally post a pic of the prototype? :-)

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Jim@Quarq] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 11:35

Post #4 of 64 (16542 views)

Way to go! Love the new crank but will you offer any other colour options other than black and red. I'd live to have blue with the Rotor �gilis.

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."

Hunter S. Thompson (1937-2005)

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [TheDC] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 11:45

Post #5 of 64 (16504 views)

Rappstar:
The Qranium got put on the back burner as we got the CinQo dialed in and production up and running. We are putting more resources to it now, especially with Cervelo TestTeam, as they will use it during testing.

Tom-
All go for prototype photos....

TheDC-
Blue - Actually Carlos requested blue for his CinQo also, but the team went with red. The SRAM version comes in Black or Red. The FSA version comes in Black or Gold (check back for a photo of the Gold one, it has some BLING!) Maybe we can work something out on the Rotor version....

Jim

James Meyer
Quarq Founder / SRAM

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Jim@Quarq] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 11:47

Post #6 of 64 (16498 views)

when will the compact spiders be available?

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Jim@Quarq] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 12:00

Post #7 of 64 (16458 views)

Are there any of the original model at the lower price still available?

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [jamiewilson3] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 13:07

Post #8 of 64 (16364 views)

We are working on the compact CinQo Saturns now. They should be ready late Jan / early Feb.

The original CinQo is all sold out, so everything we do from here forward will be Saturns.

Jim

James Meyer
Quarq Founder / SRAM

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Jim@Quarq] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 13:13

Post #9 of 64 (16349 views)

Still hoping for Compact cranks with the ability to have longer crank arms for us normal sized folk. Smile

Smile

Dave

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Jim@Quarq] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 13:15

Post #10 of 64 (16342 views)

Jim, would I be right in assuming that the Saturn with the Agilis utilises the same metal for all the parts? I recall Hunter stating at a seminar the SRM with the metal SRM crankarm gave the most reliable readings for that reason.

"How bad can it be?" - SimpleS

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Jim@Quarq] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 13:18

Post #11 of 64 (16326 views)

In Reply To:

Tom-
All go for prototype photos....

All-righty then! Here's a pic of the prototype CinQo Saturn that Jim and Mieke have been gracious enough to allow me to beta test for the past few months:

Boy...who knew that I was also testing out how well it works on a Cervelo?? ;-)

Speaking of how well it works, here's a plot of CinQo power vs. PT power for the "stock" MMP durations spit out by WKO+. This data is from ~10 rides total over the span of ~2 weeks.

Jim...I'm with Carlos...a blue version would look pretty trick on my Cervelo too ;-) Anyone for a mid-90s purple option?? Just kidding...

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Last edited by: Tom A.: Oct 12, 10 7:16

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 13:22

Post #12 of 64 (16316 views)

In Reply To:

Still hoping for Compact cranks with the ability to have longer crank arms for us normal sized folk. Smile

Smile

Dave

Why do you hate MTB cogsets? ;-)

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 13:28

Post #13 of 64 (16295 views)

I already have an 11/28 on the back. Smile

Smile

Dave

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 13:29

Post #14 of 64 (16292 views)

In Reply To:

here's a plot of CinQo power vs. PT power for the "stock" MMP durations spit out by WKO+. This data is from ~10 rides total over the span of ~2 weeks.

So on average your CinQo/Garmin 705 set-up reads 0.3% lower than your PT system? That's surprising...

Last edited by: Andrew Coggan: Dec 10, 08 13:30

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 13:40

Post #15 of 64 (16260 views)

In Reply To:

So on average your CinQo/Garmin 705 set-up reads 0.3% lower than your PT system? That's surprising...

Actually...not really surprising since in a static test, this particular CinQo reads ~1.3% (on average across both chainrings) lower than the PT.

Unfortunately, at this time neither device allows you to change the slope, only check it...but that will change once the Qranium is out. Of course, I'm sure you knew that :-)

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 13:41

Post #16 of 64 (16258 views)

In Reply To:

I already have an 11/28 on the back. Smile

Smile

Dave

That's road gearing.

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 13:55

Post #17 of 64 (16236 views)

I thought a crank based system should most likely read higher than the hub based PowerTap due not having the drivetrain losses? No?

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [rehammer81] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 14:02

Post #18 of 64 (16221 views)

In Reply To:

I thought a crank based system should most likely read higher than the hub based PowerTap due not having the drivetrain losses? No?

Yes, it should if both units torque slopes are perfectly calibrated. In this case that's not true, which isn't unusual. In fact, I've been told that for best accuracy, even SRMs that have been "factory calibrated" should have their slope checked before being put into service.

As I said above, in a static torque check (i.e. NO drivetrain losses present since the drivetrain is not moving) the CinQo read on average ~1.3% lower than the PT (the PT was ~0.3% higher than "ideal" and the CinQo ~1% lower). But, from the averages from the power files, the CinQo was reading only ~0.3% lower. In other words, relative to the PT, it does read slightly higher when the drivetrain is moving...make sense?

I guess this means my drivetrain losses on this bike are ~1%, huh? :-)

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 14:09

Post #19 of 64 (16203 views)

In Reply To:

So on average your CinQo/Garmin 705 set-up reads 0.3% lower than your PT system? That's surprising...

And actually...thinking about this some more, with the stated accuracy of the CinQo at +/-2% and the PT at +/-1.5%, even if you assume a 2.5% powertrain loss, isn't that still within the bounds of the stated accuracies?

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 14:18

Post #20 of 64 (16186 views)

Sounds good to me. :-) Is the torque curve something one could calibrate themselves or is that an internal thing the manufacturer would have to do? I am new to this power stuff. I haven't even received my PowerTap yet. Just been reading everything I can find. I was looking at the CinQo seriously but got a killer deal on the PowerTap that I couldn't pass up. It pays to know people in the bike business. ;-) I might pick up a CinQo in the future for my tri bike so that I can use different race wheels when I want. For now I am not too worried about just running the Open Pro with PT with a disc cover but someday I would like the option to run whatever wheels I wish.

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [rehammer81] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 14:26

Post #21 of 64 (16166 views)

In Reply To:

Sounds good to me. :-) Is the torque curve something one could calibrate themselves or is that an internal thing the manufacturer would have to do? I am new to this power stuff. I haven't even received my PowerTap yet. Just been reading everything I can find. I was looking at the CinQo seriously but got a killer deal on the PowerTap that I couldn't pass up. It pays to know people in the bike business. ;-) I might pick up a CinQo in the future for my tri bike so that I can use different race wheels when I want. For now I am not too worried about just running the Open Pro with PT with a disc cover but someday I would like the option to run whatever wheels I wish.

On a "proper" power meter...this is something one could check AND modify. The CinQo just doesn't have a head unit available yet that will allow the "modify" part.

On a PT, one can only "check"...however, it's been my experience (and that of many others) that the torque curve of a PT is rarely "off", except for when something is drastically wrong internally. So, being able to "modify" isn't as critical as it can be for some other PMs (i.e. SRM, CinQo, or Ergomo).

edit: However, I should state that with my limited experience with the Saturn protos (3 units between myself and a teammate), the calibrations have been pretty good "out of the box" :-)

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Last edited by: Tom A.: Dec 10, 08 14:30

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 14:30

Post #22 of 64 (16157 views)

In Reply To:

thinking about this some more, with the stated accuracy of the CinQo at +/-2% and the PT at +/-1.5%, even if you assume a 2.5% powertrain loss, isn't that still within the bounds of the stated accuracies?

My experience with SRMs and PTs is that the stated precisions are underestimates...but, yeah, the small differerences you've seen are w/in the specs.

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 15:15

Post #23 of 64 (16078 views)

Overall, I think that powermeters should "just work" right out of the box. So the first priority is to make the slope correct in the first place, and not rely on users in the field to adjust things.

That said, the CinQo is a calibrated instrument and you must be able to easily verify its calibration in the field. And if you can accurately measure the results, you may as well be able to change it also. But we are a little hesitant about that, because we want to make sure we dont cause more problems than we solve.

So to that end, we are working on a field calibration system so that our (future) dealers can set the slope in the field.

Jim

James Meyer
Quarq Founder / SRAM

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Jim@Quarq] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 15:40

Post #24 of 64 (16038 views)

Does the saturn work on the FSA carbon with the FSA chainrings?

ishi no ue ni san nen | Perseverance will win in the end. | Blog | @nebmot | Strava | Instagram |

Re: SSP: Quarq CinQo Saturn / Cervelo TestTeam [Jim@Quarq] [ In reply to ]

Dec 10, 08 16:09

Post #25 of 64 (16011 views)

In Reply To:

Overall, I think that powermeters should "just work" right out of the box. So the first priority is to make the slope correct in the first place, and not rely on users in the field to adjust things.

Jim, I agree wholeheartedly with that goal...and has been shown with the PTs, is something that can be attainable. However, doing that in a hub type structure is probably easier than in a crank-based power meter due to all the extra ways the user can "muck things up" by changing chainrings (different stiffnesses) and such...I'm not saying it's impossible, but I don't envy your task (although the Saturn model has apparently come a long way in that regards) ;-)

In Reply To:

That said, the CinQo is a calibrated instrument and you must be able to easily verify its calibration in the field. And if you can accurately measure the results, you may as well be able to change it also. But we are a little hesitant about that, because we want to make sure we dont cause more problems than we solve.

Hehehe...yep, as the old saying goes "Just when you think you've made something foolproof, the world invents a better fool!" :-) There's also something I remember about "unintended consequences, or something...

In Reply To:

So to that end, we are working on a field calibration system so that our (future) dealers can set the slope in the field.

Now that sounds like an interesting compromise...

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.